H. OF R.]

Abolition of Slavery.

[FEBRUARY, 1790.

Mr. SENEY denied that there was any thing unconstitutional in the memorial; at least, if there was it had escaped his attention, and he should be obliged to the gentleman to point it out. Its only object was, that Congress should exercise their constitutional authority to abate the horrors of slavery, as far as they could; indeed, he considered that all altercation on the subject of commitment was at an end, as the House had impliedly determined yesterday that it should be committed.

From a persuasion that equal liberty was origi- | hoped would receive no countenance from the nally the portion, and is still the birthright of all men; House. and influenced by the strong ties of humanity, and the principles of their institution, your memorialists conceive themselves bound to use all justifiable endeavors to loosen the bands of slavery, and promote a general enjoyment of the blessings of freedom. Under these impressions, they earnestly entreat your serious attention to the subject of slavery; that you will be pleased to countenance the restoration of liberty to those unhappy men, who alone, in this land of freedom, are degraded into perpetual bondage, and who, amidst the general joy of surrounding freemen, are groaning in servile subjection; that you will devise means for removing this inconsistency Mr. BURKE saw the disposition of the House, from the character of the American people; that you and he feared it would be referred to a comwill promote mercy and justice towards this dis-mittee, maugre all their opposition; but he tressed race, and that you will step to the very verge of the power vested in you for discouraging every species of traffic in the persons of our fellow-men. BENJ. FRANKLIN, President.

PHILADELPHIA, February 3, 1790.

must insist, that it prayed for an unconstitutional measure; did it not desire Congress to interfere and abolish the slave trade, while the constitution expressly stipulates that Congress shall exercise no such power? He was certain the commitment would sound an alarm, and blow Mr. HARTLEY then called up the memorial the trumpet of sedition in the Southern States. presented yesterday, from the annual meeting He was sorry to see the petitioners paid more of Friends at Philadelphia, for a second read-attention to than the constitution; however, ing; whereupon the same was read a second time, and moved to be committed.

he would do his duty and oppose the business totally; and if it was referred to a committee, as mentioned yesterday, consisting of a member from each State, and he was appointed, he would decline serving.

Mr. TUOKER was sorry the petition had a second reading, as he conceived it contained an unconstitutional request, and from that consideration he wished it thrown aside. He feared Mr. SCOTT.-I cannot entertain a doubt but the commitment of it would be a very alarming the memorial is strictly agreeable to the concircumstance to the Southern States; for if the stitution; it respects a part of the duty particuobject was to engage Congress in an unconstitu- larly assigned to us by that instrument, and I tional measure, it would be considered as an hope we may be inclined to take it into considinterference with their rights, the people would eration. We can at present lay our hands upon become very uneasy under the Government, a small duty of ten dollars; I would take this, and lament that they ever put additional powers and if it is all that we can do, we must be coninto their hands. He was surprised to see ano- tent: but I am sorry that the framers of the ther memorial on the same subject; and that constitution did not go further, and enable us signed by a man who ought to have known the to interdict the traffic entirely; for I look upon constitution better. He thought it a mis- the slave trade to be one of the most abominachievous attempt, as it respected the persons in ble things on earth; and if there was neither whose favor it was intended. It would buoy God nor devil, I should oppose it upon the them up with hopes, without a foundation, and principles of humanity, and the law of nature. as they could not reason on the subject, as more I cannot, for my part, conceive how any person enlightened men would, they might be led to can be said to acquire a property in another; do what they would be punished for, and the is it by virtue of conquest? What are the rights owners of them, in their own defence, would of conquest? Some have dared to advance this be compelled to exercise over them a severity monstrous principle, that the conqueror is abthey were not accustomed to. Do these men solute master of his conquest; that he may disexpect a general emancipation of slaves by law? pose of it as his property, and treat it as he This would never be submitted to by the South-pleases; but, enough of those who reduce men ern States without a civil war. Do they mean to purchase their freedom? He believed their money would fall short of the price. But how is it they are more concerned in this business than others? Are they the only persons who possess religion and morality? If the people are not so exemplary, certainly they will admit the clergy are; why, then, do we not find them uniting in a body, praying us to adopt measures for the promotion of religion and piety, or any moral object? They know it would be an improper interference; and to say the best of this memorial, it is an act of imprudence, which he

to the state of transferable goods, or use them like beasts of burthen, who deliver them up as property or patrimony to others. Let us argue on principles countenanced by reason and becoming humanity; the petitioners view the subject in a religious light, but I do not stand in need of religious motives to induce me to reprobate the traffic in human flesh; other considerations weigh with me to support the commitment of the memorial, and to support every constitutional measure likely to bring about its total abolition. Perhaps, in our Legislative capacity, we can go no further than to impose a

duty of ten dollars; but I do not know how far I might go, if I was one of the Judges of the United States, and those people were to come before me and claim their emancipation; but I am sure I would go as far as I could.

[H. OF R.

| every thing else is interdicted to them in the strongest terms. If we examine the constitution, we shall find the expressions relative to this subject cautiously expressed, and more punctiliously guarded than any other part, The migration or importation of such persons shall not be prohibited by Congress." But lest this should not have secured the object sufficiently, it is declared, in the same section, "That no capitation or direct tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census; this was intended to prevent Congress from laying any special tax upon negro slaves, as they might, in this way, so burthen the possessors of them as to induce a general emancipation. If we go on to the fifth article, we shall find the first and fifth clauses of the ninth section of the first article restrained from being altered before the year 1808.

Mr. JACKSON differed with the gentleman last up, and supposed the master had a qualified property in his slave. He said the contrary doctrine would go to the destruction of every species of personal service. The gentleman said, he did not stand in need of religion to induce him to reprobate slavery, but if he is guided by that evidence upon which the Christian system is founded, he will find that religion is not against it. He will see, from Genesis to Revelations, the current setting strong that way. There never was a Government on the face of the earth, but what permitted slavery. The purest sons of freedom in the Grecian Republics, the citizens of Athens and Lacedæmon, all held slaves. On this principle the nations of Europe are associated; it is the basis of the feudal system. But suppose all this to have been wrong, let me ask the gentleman if it is good policy to bring forward a business at this moment, likely to light up the flame of civil discord; for the Mr. SYLVESTER said, that he had always been people of the Southern States will resist one in the habit of respecting the Society called tyranny as soon as another? The other parts Quakers; he respected them for their exertions of the continent may bear them down by force in the cause of humanity; but he thought the of arms, but they will never suffer themselves present was not a time to enter into a conto be divested of their property without a strug-sideration of the subject, especially as he congle. The gentleman says, if he was a Federal ceived it to be a business within the province of Judge, he does not know to what length he would the State Legislatures. go in emancipating these people; but I believe his judgment would be of short duration in Georgia, perhaps even the existence of such a judge might be in danger.

Mr. SHERMAN could see no difficulty in committing the memorial; because it was probable the committee would understand their business, and perhaps they might bring in such a report as would be satisfactory to gentlemen on both sides of the House.

Mr. BALDWIN was sorry the subject had ever been brought before Congress, because it was of a delicate nature as it respected some of the States. Gentlemen who had been present at the formation of this constitution could not avoid the recollection of the pain and difficulty which the subject caused in that body. The members from the Southern States were so tender upon this point, that they had well-nigh broken up without coming to any determination; however, from the extreme desire of preserving the Union, and obtaining an efficient Government, they were induced mutually to concede, and the constitution jealously guarded what they agreed to. If gentlemen look over the footsteps of that body, they will find the greatest degree of caution used to imprint them, so as not to be easily eradicated; but the moment we go to jostle on that ground, I fear we shall feel it tremble under our feet. Congress have no power to interfere with the importation of slaves beyond what is given in the ninth section of the first article of the constitution; VOL I-14

Gentlemen have said that this petition does not pray for an abolition of the slave trade. I think, sir, it prays for nothing else; and therefore we have no more to do with it than if it prayed us to establish an order of nobility, or a national religion.

Mr. LAWRENCE observed, that the subject would undoubtedly come under the consideration of the House; and he thought, as it was now before them, that the present time was as proper as any; he was therefore for committing the memorial, and when the prayer of it had been properly examined, they could see how far Congress may, constitutionally, interfere: as they knew the limits of their power on this, as well as every other occasion, there was no just apprehension to be entertained that they would go beyond it.

Mr. SMITH (of South Carolina) insisted that it was not in the power of the House to grant the prayer of the petition, which went to the total abolishment of the slave trade, and it was therefore unnecessary to commit it. He observed, that in the Southern States difficulties had arisen on adopting the constitution, inasmuch as it was apprehended that Congress might take measures under it for abolishing the slave trade.

Perhaps the petitioners, when they applied to this House, did not think their object unconstitutional, but now they are told that it is, they will be satisfied with the answer, and press it no further. If their object had been for Congress to lay a duty of ten dollars per head on the importation of slaves, they would have said so, but that does not appear to have been the case. The commitment of the petition, on that ground, cannot be contended. If they will not be content with that, shall it be committed to

H. OF R.]

Abolition of Slavery.

[FEBRUARY, 1790.

investigate facts? The petition speaks of none. | have as much humanity as persons in any part For what purpose, then, shall it be committed? of the continent, and are as conspicuous for their If gentlemen can assign no good reason for the good morals as their neighbors. It was said measure, they will not support it when they yesterday that the Quakers are a society known are told that it will create jealousies and alarm to the laws and the constitution, but they are no in the Southern States; for I can assure them more so than other religious societies; they that there is no point on which they are more stand exactly in the same situation; their mejealous and suspicious, than on a business with morial, therefore, relates to a matter in which which they think the Government has nothing they are no more interested than any other sect, to do. and can only be considered as a piece of advice, which it is not customary to refer to a committee; but if it is supposed to pray for what they think a moral purpose, is that sufficient to induce us to commit it? What may appear a moral virtue in their eyes, may not be so in reality. I have heard of a sect of Shaking Quakers, who, I presume, suppose their tenets of a moral tendency. I am informed one of them forbids to intermarry, yet you may see them with a numerous offspring about them. Now, if these people were to petition Congress to pass a law prohibiting matrimony, would gentlemen agree to refer such a petition? I think if they would reject one of that nature, as improper, they ought also to reject this.

When we entered into this confederacy, we did it from political, not from moral motives, and I do not think my constituents want to learn morals from the petitioners; I do not believe they want improvements in their moral system; if they do, they can get it at home.

The gentleman from Georgia has justly stated the jealousy of the Southern States. On entering into this Government, they apprehend that the other States, not knowing the necessity the citizens of the Southern States were under to hold this species of property, would, from motives of humanity and benevolence, be led to vote for a general emancipation; and had they not seen that the constitution provided against the effect of such a disposition, I may be bold to say they never would have adopted it. And, notwithstanding all the calmness with which some gentlemen have viewed the subject, they will find that this discussion alone will create great alarm. We have been told, that if this would be the case, we ought to have avoided it, by saying nothing; but it was not for that purpose that we were sent here. We look upon this measure as an attack upon the palladium of the property of our country; it is therefore our duty to oppose it by every means in our power. Gentlemen should consider, that when we entered into a political connection with the other States, that this property was there; it was acquired under a former Government, conformably to the laws and constitution, therefore any thing that will tend to deprive them of that property, must be an ex post facto law, and, as such, is forbidden by our political compact.

I said the States would never have entered into the Confederation, unless their property had been guarantied to them, for such is the state of agriculture in that country, that without slaves it must be abandoned. Why will these people, then, make use of arguments to induce the slave to turn his hand against his master? We labor under difficulties enough from the ravages of the late war. A gentleman can hardly come from that country with a servant or two, either to this place or Philadelphia, but there are persons trying to seduce his servants to leave him; and, when they have done this, the poor wretches are obliged to rob their master, in order to obtain a subsistence; all those, therefore, who are concerned in this seduction, are accessories to the robbery.

The reproaches which they cast upon the owners of negro property, is charging them with the want of humanity. I believe the proprietors

Mr. PAGE was in favor of the commitment. He hoped that the designs of the respectable memoralists would not be stopped at the threshold, in order to preclude a fair discussion of the prayer of the memorial. He observed, that gentlemen had founded their arguments upon a misrepresentation; for the object of the memorial is not declared to be the total abolition of the slave trade, but that Congress will consider whether it be not in reality within their power to exercise justice and mercy, which, if adhered to, they cannot doubt must produce the abolition of the slave trade. If, then, the prayer contained nothing unconstitutional, he trusted the meritorious effort of the petitioners would not be frustrated.

With respect to the alarm that was apprehended, he conjectured there was none; but there might be just cause if the memorial was not taken into consideration. He placed himself in the case of a slave, and said, that, on hearing that Congress had refused to listen to the decent suggestions of a respectable part of the community, he should infer that the General Government (from which was expected great good would result to every class of citizens) had shut their ears against the voice of humanity, and he should despair of any alleviation of the miseries he and his posterity had in prospect; if any thing could induce him to rebel, it must be a stroke like this, impressing on his mind all the horrors of despair. But if he was told that application was made in his behalf, and that Congress was willing to hear what could be urged in favor of discouraging the practice of importing his fellow-wretches, he would trust in their justice and humanity, and wait the decision patiently. He presumed that these unfortunate people would reason in the same way, and he, therefore, conceived the most likely way to prevent danger was to commit the peti

FEBRUARY, 1790.]

Public Credit.

tion. He lived in a State which had the misfortune of having in her bosom a great number of slaves; he held many of them himself, and was as much interested in the business, as any gentleman in South Carolina or Georgia, yet if he was determined to hold them in eternal bondage, he should feel no uneasiness or alarm on account of the present measure, because he should rely upon the virtue of Congress that they would not exercise any unconstitutional authority.

Mr. MADISON.-The debate has taken a serious turn, and it will be owing to this alone if an alarm is created; for, had the memorial been treated in the usual way, it would have been considered as a matter of course, and a report might have been made so as to have given general satisfaction. If there was the slightest tendency by the commitment to break in upon the constitution, he would object to it; but he did not see upon what ground such an event was to be apprehended. The petition prayed, in general terms, for the interference of Congress, so far as they were constitutionally authorized: but even if its prayer was, in some degree, unconstitutional, it might be committed, as was the case on Mr. Churchman's petition, one part of which was supposed to apply for an unconstitutional interference by the General Government. He admitted, that Congress is restricted by the constitution from taking measures to abolish the slave trade; yet there are a variety of ways by which it could countenance the abolition, and regulations might be made in relation to the introduction of them into the new States to be formed out of the

Western Territory. He thought the object well worthy of consideration.

Mr. GERRY thought the interference of Congress fully compatible with the constitution, and could not help lamenting the miseries to which the natives of Africa were exposed by this inhuman commerce. He never contemplated the subject, without reflecting what his own feelings would be, in case himself, his children, or friends were placed in the same deplorable cirHe then adverted to the flagrant cumstances. acts of cruelty which are committed in carrying on that traffic; and asked, whether it can be supposed that Congress has no power to preHe then referred to the vent such abuses? constitution, and pointed out the restrictions laid on the General Government respecting the importation of slaves. It was not, he presumed, in the contemplation of any gentleman in this House to violate that part of the constitution; but that we have a right to regulate this business, is as clear as that we have any rights whatever; nor has the contrary been shown by any person who has spoken on the occasion. Congress can, agreeably to the constitution, lay a duty of ten dollars on imported slaves; they may do this immediately. He made a calculation of the value of the slaves in the Southern States, and supposed they may be worth ten millions of dollars. Congress have a right, if

211

[H. OF R.

they see proper, to make a proposal to the Southern States to purchase the whole of them, and their resources in the Western Territory might furnish them with the means. He did not intend to suggest a measure of this kind; he only instanced these particulars to show that Congress certainly has a right to intermeddle in the business. He thought that no objection had been offered of any force to prevent the commitment of the memorial.

Mr. BOUDINOT had carefully examined the petition and found nothing like what was complained of by gentlemen contained in it; he, therefore, hoped they would withdraw their opposition and suffer it to be committed.

Mr. SMITH (of South Carolina) said, that as the petitioners had particularly prayed Congress to take measures for the annihilation of the slave trade; and as that was admitted, on all hands, to be beyond their power, and as the petitioners would not be gratified by a tax of ten dollars per head, which was all that was within their power, there was, of consequence, no occasion for committing it.

The question on the commitment being about to be put, the yeas and nays were called for, and were as follows:

YEAS.-Messrs. Ames, Benson, Boudinot, Brown, Cadwalader, Clymer, Fitzsimons, Floyd, Foster, Gale, Gerry, Gilman, Goodhue, Griffin, Grout, Hartley, Hathorn, Heister, Huntington, Lawrence, Lee, Leon ard, Livermore, Madison, Moore, Muhlenberg, Page, Parker, Partridge, Rensselaer, Schureman, Scott, Sedgwick, Seney, Sherman, Sinnickson, Smith, (of Maryland,) Sturges, Thatcher, Trumbull, Wadsworth, White, and Wynkoop-43.

NAYS.-Messrs. Baldwin, Bland, Burke, Coles, Huger, Jackson, Matthews, Sylvester, Smith, (of South Carolina,) Stone, and Tucker-14.

The memorials were referred accordingly.

MONDAY, February 15.

Public Credit.

The House went again into a Committee of the Whole on the report of the Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. BALDWIN in the chair.

Mr. MADISON'S motion for a discrimination being under consideration,

Mr. SEDGWICK.-The proposition, Mr. Chairman, contains a question of the utmost importance. And the committee must be obliged to the gentleman who brought it forward for his very ingenious discussion of the subject of the domestic debt. With respect to the question now before the committee, so much has been said, that I think it will not be necessary to consume much of their time in the investigation. On the subject of contracts I have to observe, that whenever a voluntary engagement is made for a valuable consideration for property advanced or services rendered, and the terms of the contract are understood, if no fraud or imposition is practised, the party engaging is bound to the performance, according to the literal meaning of the words in which it is expressed. Such contract, whether of a Govern

H. OF R.]

Public Credit.

[FEBRUARY, 1790.

ment or an individual, may be either transfer- | ment to invade the honestly acquired property able or not transferable. The latter species of of the present possessors, a property warranted contract receives an additional value from its ca- by the terms of the contract itself, and sancpacity of being transferred, if the circumstances tioned by the act of Congress, of April, 1783, of the possessor should render a sale of it neces- and the validity of it recognized by the constitusary or convenient to him. To render the trans- tion we have sworn to support. ferable quality of such evidences of contract in any degree advantageous to the possessor, it is necessary to consider, in case of sale, the alienee possessed of all the property of the original holder; and indeed it is highly absurd, and even contradictory, to say, that such evidences of debt are transferable, and at the same time to say that there is in them a kind of property that the holder could not convey by bona fide |

contract.

This is the construction which has invariably been given to these contracts, whether formed by Government or by individuals. To deprive the citizen of the power of binding himself by his own voluntary contract, or to prevent a disposition of property in its nature alienable, would be a violent and unjustifiable invasion of one of those rights of which man, as a citizen, is the most tenacious, and would indeed break one of the strongest bonds by which society is holden together.

In the transfers which have been made, the contracts were fairly made; the whole rights have been transferred. It is not pretended any fraud or imposition has been practised. The risk was calculated by the parties, and it was observed, that the risk contemplated a revolution in the Government.

With regard to the claims of the original holders, it is, however, observable, that the domestic creditor, at the time the contract was formed, well knew the nature of the constitution of the Government administered by Congress, the other contracting party; that its power of performance depended on the ability and good-will of the States; that Congress had always performed its duty, had made the necessary requisitions; that this was its utmost power; and that the failure had arisen wholly from the neglect of the States. I therefore submit it to the committee, whether, if the original holder has a just or equitable demand, he should not resort to the State of which he is a member?

I admit, that the case of an original holder is indeed a hard one; that I have a respect for his misfortunes and for his pretensions; that if satisfaction is discovered to be just and practicable, I would not hesitate to go to the utmost ability of the Government for that purpose. But let me ask, what merit will the Government possess, if it strip one class of citizens, who have acquired property by the known and established rules of law, under the specious pretence of doing justice to another class of citizens?

From the foregoing deduction of particulars, It was implicitly agreed, that eighty per cent. it is presumed to be proved that a property is depreciation would not authorize the interfevested in the transferees. That if this proper-rence proposed by the motion. I ask, then, for ty is divested by the Government, the law for some point of depreciation to be pointed out, that purpose would have a retrospective opera- which will authorize such interference. tion, and that no ex post facto law could be more alarming than that by which the right of private property is violently invaded.

The question for which I contend has received the universal approbation of mankind; there are no instances of the interference contended for, and this general sense of mankind affords me some evidence of truth.

Having considered the nature of the contract, and of the obligations which result from it, I beg leave to call the attention of the committee This contract was founded on a valuable conto those circumstances by which that obligation sideration. It was the price of our liberty and may be destroyed, impaired, or suspended. independence. The possessor claimed, accordThey are stated to be, 1. Performance. 2. Vol-ing to the very terms of the contract, though it untary discharge. 3. Composition. 4. Inability.

And gentlemen are called upon to give information of any other causes which can produce either of those effects:

With regard, more particularly, to the proposition before the committee, I have, to observe, that with regard to these contracts, there has existed a depreciation in consequence of the failure of Government regularly to pay the interest. That in this depreciated state, the securities have been alienated; that of course the original holders have sustained a loss; that if the loss resulted from the fault, and not the misfortune of Government, the creditors have, undeniably, a demand against the Government for compensation; that this demand, however well founded, can never authorize the Govern

is not pretended that the engagements of Government have been performed. No composition with the creditors is proposed; nor is the proposition founded on any pretended inability of the Government; for to comply with the intention of it, 1,600,000 dollars, annually, more than is proposed by the report of the Secretary, would be required.

By reason of the circumstances which have taken place, the honorable gentleman (Mr. MaDISON) supposes, that, if the whole amount of a security shall be paid to the present possessor, he will have a sum of money to which the original holder is equitably entitled. If this is true, then, no interposition is necessary, it being a well-known rule of law, that an action will always lie to recover money out of the hands of another, to which the plaintiff, from